Eris wrote:
Simpler -- don't give Partnerships any free votes.
Sigh. But that's the point. If you're not going to grant partnerships
any benefits of registering why regulate them at all? It's just a
wasted Rule.
Murphy has a proposal which says "persons are natural persons only",
which very simply blocks all rights of partnerships toward votes.
Then this second proposal says, "people may form partnerships, but by
the way there's no benefit in doing so, they're still blocked from
having rights, and they have no special abilities that aren't already
covered by agreements."
So what's the point of the second rule at all?
-Goethe
